Annual general report of the controller and - Parliament of Tanzania

• A further invoice No. 402706 from the broker for
similar reasons of US$ 1,028,903 indicated that
the Insurer was M/S Scintilla Insurance Company
of South Africa.
We found that the Bank had no replacement
insurance policies, or endorsements, as the case may
be, issued by the named new insurers.
(vii) Bank is not in possession of Contractor’s Policy
required under clause 18 & 19.
The Contractor was required under clauses 18 and 19
of the contract to maintain an insurance policy in a
joint name that covers the contractor and the Bank
against risks of injury or death to persons and
damages to property which result from actions of the
contractor. However, the Bank does not have in its
possession a copy of such policy. This implies that
Bank may have paid insurance premiums to its
Broker while no insurance policies were in existence
and possibly the bank had no cover at the time and
the Bank may have paid excessive amount of
insurance premiums due to the application of
unjustified excessive premium rates. In addition, the
manner in which the insurance transactions were
conducted, nature of the transaction, sufficiency of
documentary evidence has raised major uncertainty
regarding the regularity, authenticity and hence
validity of the transaction.
Based on the limited information provided the depth
of our review, we treat this matter as highly
suspicious. The management should institute a
competent independent investigation on the
transactions and take appropriate cause of action
including recovery of the premiums.
___________________________________________________________
Office of the Controller and Auditor General PA&oBs 2007/08 149